The experience of turning a system with instant on is not foreign to the PC - as Cal said- its all the same hardware.

That's an interesting statement, because the MBA had this feature in 2008 when it debuted. When I say instant on, I mean instant on (not the conventional "wake from sleep"), and that means immediate access to internet, etc. and everything as soon as you open the cover. Over THREE YEARS later, the Asus Zenbook (which I also own, BTW) advertises "2 second resume" - and is the only PC based laptop I've used that has a comparable "instant on" kind of experience.

Asus was shipping an instant-on operating system on their motherboards since around the same time (2008). Asus' version was called Express Gate and would boot into a Linux-derivative in about 5 seconds. Dell has had something similar on their Latitude line called Latitude ON since 2009.

Comparing the sadness that is/was Express Gate with the full operating system of a Mac is just not a fair comparison, and only further emphasizes the problem with your "bang for the buck" argument. Throwing together a list of features and specs can give you a quantified answer/number for comparison, but rarely tells the true story, and your statement above is a perfect example. Anyone who has actually used a Macbook Air (again I don't know if this is true for MBP) and compared it to Express Gate will understand equating this two things as the same feature is really a (sad) joke. In one case you get complete access to your entire system, all your applications, and the full power of your OS - whereas in the other you get access to a gimped shell OS, none of your real apps, and a mediocre browser and media player.

lol, u mad bro?

The main reason the MBA boots that quick is the SSD, which wasn't (and still isn't) common on Windows based laptops. The Eee PC could load Fedora in ~ 10 seconds in 2008, which is still pretty instant-on. With a little effort you can get it down to 5. If you put a SSD in a laptop from that time, it would boot Ubuntu just as fast. Vista is a dog for booting, but Win7 is much improved. Likely on par with the MBA. Granted, Windows 7 wasn't out until 2009...

I totally understand that you really love your MBA, I think it's a great machine and highly recommend it. The crux of what I'm saying is that while Apples are great machines, it doesn't do anything more magical than your standard Windows 7 machine, it's just different. It's like Oranges and Tangerines, you can like both even though they're similar.

... and a good friend of mine just went through a MBP upgrade to SSD in the summer of 2011 to get that "instant on" - I did the same to my desktop PC (which has far more hardware and isn't streamlined to fast boot).

You claim you can run everything, but in your cost (assuming you want to run Windows Only software), you're paying for two operating systems.

When apple decides to go in a direction (hardware OR software) they take their entire customer base in that direction. When Microsoft goes in one direction, they have open competition that doesn't afford them the same luxury. Their path forward isn't as simple as saying "stay where you are or come with us". They can't force people to use Zune, processor X, or mainboard Y.

I, as a consumer, don't give them that power over my computer.

Bang-for-buck is based on cost for processing, and isn't nearly as subjective as you make it out to be. The computer is a tool. Some tools, a hammer for instance, have contoured handles, and some have other features. The hammer is a hammer - its primary function is to bang nails in wood. That contoured handle may cost more but saves you needing to wear gloves. If I wear gloves anyways, why would I buy a contoured grip? The nails still go in the wall, and if the grip costs more than gloves, it is less bang for the buck. Unless that contoured handle is saving me money - bang for BUCK doesn't care.

Now, if you're "bang" is walking around with a really thin laptop with an apple OS on it, then you're not interested in a discussion. If you were browsing, computing, and general tasks (you'll note I left out gaming, as clearly there is a big disparity), the Apple laptop will cost more. That may be your preference, but preference has nothing to do with comparison of cost.

« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 03:36:59 AM by Purge »

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

The bang part is completely subjective. Bang is user experience. The buck part is easy. Your cost per year of owning the item is (Initial cost - Resale value)/(Years owned). I would posit that the buck part of the equation is far less of a discrepancy than you're making it out to be due to the fact that a) the resale value of the Mac is much higher and b) Macs are better built than all but the most expensive Windows laptops, so will last longer.

The bang part is completely subjective. Bang is user experience. The buck part is easy. Your cost per year of owning the item is (Initial cost - Resale value)/(Years owned). I would posit that the buck part of the equation is far less of a discrepancy than you're making it out to be due to the fact that a) the resale value of the Mac is much higher and b) Macs are better built than all but the most expensive Windows laptops, so will last longer.

Unless you have warranty, repair and product failure stats, your argument is begging the question.

Bang isn't "I like blue cars, so this blue porsche is a better bang for the buck than this red corvette". Bang is how fast does it go, how does it handle, and whether the damned thing can get from point A to B.

OSX vs Windows, based on the entire concept in the OP, is irrelevant as a "this one is more effective". Both are viable, or he wouldn't be asking.

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

The bang part is completely subjective. Bang is user experience. The buck part is easy. Your cost per year of owning the item is (Initial cost - Resale value)/(Years owned). I would posit that the buck part of the equation is far less of a discrepancy than you're making it out to be due to the fact that a) the resale value of the Mac is much higher and b) Macs are better built than all but the most expensive Windows laptops, so will last longer.

Economists would like to have a word with you. Everything is measurable, even things we think of as subjective. The resale value on Macs is higher because there is a price premium for the name and the idea of what owning a Mac is about. Going with the car analogy, it's a whole lot like a Prius. A Prius isn't any better built than a Civic Hybrid, but the perceived value is higher because of the premium for the name and "green" reputation. There was a Freakonomics podcast on this exact subject (conspicuous consumption). Cost per year is a little more complicated than that, plus it assumes that you're going to resell it at some point. For many people, myself included, the resale value is $0 because I don't resell my old laptops.

Macs aren't any better built than a comparably priced Windows laptop, they just have a significantly better reputation. These aren't the old PowerPC vs. X86 arguments of yore, they are literally using the same components. You can't compare the built quality of a $400 Windows Laptop to a $1800 15" MBP and draw a conclusion. If you're comparing $1800 15" laptop to $1800 15" laptop, you'll find they're made similarly.

With all the talk about the resale value, I'm curious what the size of the secondary market is... With the rate of obsolescence in computers, it can't be that large...

I guess we have different interpretations of "bang" lol. I'm in total agreement things like the "instant on" are all part of a subjective criteria; that was pretty much the point I was making. (In fact I don't think Apple ever used it as a marketing feature, at least not in the same way Asus does on the page I linked.)

My whole point is this: to ME, a device is more than the sum of its parts, more than the sum of its specifications, particularly when you get into things like laptops and tablets, which are more personal and "intimate" devices for lack of a better word. So if a friend or acquanitance asks for advice, I generally assess from as personal a standpoint as I can, depending on how well I know them and what they are looking for. For example, some people don't give a crap about weight or form factor, but to others it's extremely important.

For $999, I know I could get something like a fully loaded Asus notebook with all the bells and whistles, or maybe an Alienware M11x. If I only pay attention to the core specifications, these are going to track far better from a pure "specification per dollar" comparison. But if I start delving a bit deeper, I realize that both those options weigh about 2-3 times more than the MBA. If I'm in the market for a desktop replacement, obviously that's a non-factor. But if I plan to travel with it, maybe take it to work, move it from room to room, or even sit it on my lap in bed, that's a major difference that's not in the traditional spec comparison. The "instant on" thing is a bit more esoteric, but it's a similar argument. I can't tangibly give a number to summarize the $ value of having the instant access, but let's just say once you get used to it, it just feels like the natural way to use a laptop. Grab it, flip it open, click on email or whatever and boom I'm doing it. When I'm done (or not), I close the cover. Whether it's another hour later or even a week, I can flip it open again and it's in exactly the state I left it in. That's just something I can't put an exact price tag on, but personally, it makes me happy, and arguably more efficient over the long haul.

Short version, like Aenima said, to me, bang is subjective. If you said more "specs for the buck," I'd certainly agree.

i'm hoping the only big changes for iPad 3 will be siri and a better screen. if that's all they upgrade, i can hold out for iPad 4.

Rumors indicate it will also be a smaller tablet but due to the high rez screen it's hard to tell. If that's the case, I will probably stick with my ipad2. But who knows. Show me a shiny new Apple product and I seem to lose all reason regarding my wallet.

With all the talk about the resale value, I'm curious what the size of the secondary market is... With the rate of obsolescence in computers, it can't be that large...

Yeah, see, Macs kind of buck that trend.

While I know this isn't exactly unheard of in the PC world, the fact of the matter is that the machines are engineered to work very well with the software. OSX doesn't have to support a billion different hardware configurations like Windows or Linux does.

Every Apple laptop I've owned has worked exceptionally well for around 4-6 years, easy. Additionally, even older Macs are extremely capable when it comes to music and video editing and production.

i'm hoping the only big changes for iPad 3 will be siri and a better screen. if that's all they upgrade, i can hold out for iPad 4.

Rumors indicate it will also be a smaller tablet but due to the high rez screen it's hard to tell. If that's the case, I will probably stick with my ipad2. But who knows. Show me a shiny new Apple product and I seem to lose all reason regarding my wallet.

i'm hoping the only big changes for iPad 3 will be siri and a better screen. if that's all they upgrade, i can hold out for iPad 4.

Rumors indicate it will also be a smaller tablet but due to the high rez screen it's hard to tell. If that's the case, I will probably stick with my ipad2. But who knows. Show me a shiny new Apple product and I seem to lose all reason regarding my wallet.

With all the talk about the resale value, I'm curious what the size of the secondary market is... With the rate of obsolescence in computers, it can't be that large...

Yeah, see, Macs kind of buck that trend.

While I know this isn't exactly unheard of in the PC world, the fact of the matter is that the machines are engineered to work very well with the software. OSX doesn't have to support a billion different hardware configurations like Windows or Linux does.

Every Apple laptop I've owned has worked exceptionally well for around 4-6 years, easy. Additionally, even older Macs are extremely capable when it comes to music and video editing and production.

Yep. My iMac is more than 3 years old now, and I was happy to see that it's still supported under Mountain Lion, which means I won't be upgrading for another year at least. Hoping I'd get 5 years out of this thing, which is looking likely. Well, unless the optical drive decides to die - again (died twice already - thank god for AppleCare).

More money for the iPad and iPhone!

Quote from: Crusis on February 19, 2012, 05:38:39 PM

Quote from: hepcat on February 19, 2012, 04:58:46 PM

Hmmm...unless they have a very aggressive trade in plan, I still think I can hold out.

My trade in plan last year was selling my iPad 2 for about $400 on Amazon before the iPad 2 came out. If the iPad3 indeed has the same size screen at a higher rez, I'll be doing the same thing.

Yep. Sell a month before, then buy the new one.

Though for me it was the original iPad this year (sold for $340). IMO, upgrading every year is silly.